How little confidence can we have in this government's handling of swine flu ?

When swine flu first struck the British government proudly told people we were the second best prepared country in the world (France is the best) to cope with a pandemic.

I listed HERE how much the government got wrong with swine flu, but it seems they are continuing to cock up time and time again.

We read this week that the flu hotline is only staffed at 25% of the levels that will be required for the second bigger wave of infection, with the government having no plans in place to provide for extra staffing.

Then we read that the government are not training staff at airports to spot the signs of passengers with swine flu so as to stop them spreading the infection further. This is despite earlier claims back in April that there is no point in monitoring people leaving or arriving on aircraft as the symptoms cannot be spotted. This, of course, has proven to be wrong. The Chinese using temperature scanners have identified British tourists arriving who have early symptoms but no obvious signs of flu.

Now we read that the Americans are saying that pregnant women are four times more likely to suffer from complications than those who are not pregnant. Again, our government seems almost totally unaware, yet it was our government that lobbied hard to stop the WHO declaring it a pandemic whilst offering advice to pregnant women that simply said "avoid crowded places".

At every point in the swine flu crisis this government has cocked up. Is there anything this government does right ?

I don't really care about the swearing

Was I shocked to hear that David Cameron swore on national radio ? No. It takes a lot to offend me. To be honest, for once he sounded like an ordinary bloke rather than the pompous toff I usually see him as.

Was it a silly thing to do ? I think so. It showed a lack of judgement.

Will it affect poll ratings ? No. I think David Cameron could kick walking sticks away from old people and he would still have a healthy poll lead. This won't affect him one bit.

I guess this is one of those things that gets the political classes very excited but matters not one iota to the general public.

I don't care if a politician swears like a trooper, smokes 40 cigarettes a day and drinks to excess if he or she knows how to put the country back in order, show real leadership on the world stage, stop dragging us in to wars we have not properly prepared for and in general shows an understand and bond with the plight of the British people.

Now is David Cameron that man ? Don't be a tw*t !

Are we being ripped off over soft drink prices ?

I went to the shop earlier to buy some cola (I'm not bother which brand). But I was astonished at the price we are being asked to pay for small amounts of drink.

I went to but a 500ml bottle and the price was 90 pence (or 2 for £1.60). But a 1 litre bottle of the same brand was 65 pence. So I was being asked to pay 25 pence more for half the amount or if I bought two bottles of the 1/2 litre bottles I could pay 95 pence more than it costs to buy a one litre bottle.

The pricing policy seems to be set to rip off the younger market who will buy a 500ml bottle but not a one litre or 2 litre bottle. This price differential seems to punish people exponentially for buying what they need and not buying to excess. I understand that there are economies of scale, but it should not cost 25 pence less to produce twice as much.

The next time the OFT are investigating pricse in supermarkets and price fixing by major brands perhaps this should be investigated.

Can I draw your attention to the clock ?

Iain Dale's top ten blogs has just 48 hours until the polls close.

If you want to vote, Click HERE to link to Iain's site and from there you can find the link to vote.

Independents on ego trips

In the wake of the expenses scandal, there were a number of people putting their names forward or had others putting their names forward as strong independent candidates who would work to kick out those who have abused the system. Amongst this group was Esther Rantzen.

Ms Rantzen said that if Margaret Moran , the Labour MP for Luton South, did not stand down, she would stand against her. All well and good. After all, if Ms Rantzen is dedicated to cleaning up politics she would be a formidable opponents of anyone who had abused the system. The problem is that Margaret Moran will be standing down, but Ms Rantzen insists she is still standing.

So who is Ms Rantzen opposing now ? If she is standing to oppose the abuse of expenses, then all her opponents in the election, those representing the Lib Dems, Tories and Labour are all clean, with no guilt associated with them as regards expenses. So what does she hope to gain ?

In my opinion it is more to do with ego than principle. Ms Rantzen is only famous in recent years for appearing on a reality show which attempted to find her a date, appearing on another celebrity reality show in "I'm a Celebrity", been rolled out as another celeb on "Who do you think you are" then doing a one off special on "political correctness" on ITV which spoke volumes about her lack of knowledge of politics, education and the law. In essence she has used up all her celebrity appearances.

It must be difficult for someone deprived of publicity for so long to suddenly be in the spotlight again and not want to let it go. But if Esther Rantzen genuinely believes that she can clean up politics, why isn't she standing against one of the dozens of MPs who have done wrong and are not resigning ?

For Esther read Ego.

Ronnie Biggs - A personal tragedy for his family but justice is being done

The ongoing media fuss over Ronnie Biggs being in intensive care in Norwich is certainly filling some news gaps locally and nationally in what is usually referred to as the silly season, but it does serve to highlight that elements of our justice system do work.

Firstly, I have every sympathy with his family who must be going through a very difficult time at the moment. I can understand why they are arguing so strenuously for his release, but sadly i completely disagree with them.

Biggs family argue that as an elderly ill man he represents no risk of re offending and should be released on this basis. Presumably Saddam Hussein was in no position to re offend when removed from power in Iraq when he was deposed too ? This argument hold no water given Biggs circumstances. The reason he is in no position to reoffend is because in those years when he might have been able and active, he chose to live out of reach of british justice in Brazil, sticking two fingers up to the UK, rubbing out noses in his freedom when he should have been serving his punishment for his crime.

If Biggs had served his prison sentence if he had shown any kind of open remorse for his crimes rather than simply feeling sorry for himself, he would be free now.

As it is Biggs only chose to return to this country in order to receive free health care when his health had deteriorated. In many ways this makes his hiding from justice worse. He didn't want to respect our laws when hiding in Brazil, but wants to make full use of his rights to claim NHS care. He wants all the rights with none of the responsibilities.

So whilst I extend my sympathies and understanding to his family and his son, who has spoken up well on his fathers behalf, I have to agree with the judgement Jack Straw made a few months ago that Biggs should remain in prison serving the sentence he was given all those years ago.

Dodgy sales patter from Talk Talk

My doorbell rang this afternoon and I was greeted by a smartly dressed lady of Indian subcontinent lineage, saying those dreaded words "It's alright, I'm not selling anything". This is nearly always a sign that they are selling something.

She started by saying that she was just checking I'd got my letter from BT stating the exchange had been upgraded and I could now claim free calls. Now I know we had received no such letter, but I replied that I had received a letter from BT (we had received a bill) , and she seemed slightly confused. I asked who she was calling on behalf of, she replied she was just calling to check that we were getting our free calls. After further discussion, she mentioned that as BT customers we could stay signed up with BT and also sign up for Talk Talk, and she could do that on the doorstep if I simply signed up there and then.

I pointed out that I am in an Internet contract with BT and I am happy with my service, but she persisted that I was entitled to my free calls with Talk Talk and that BT had arranged this service with Talk Talk.

I then said quite clearly that I wasn't interested and closed the door. But I am extremely disappointed that Talk Talk seem to be using very underhand methods in trying to get people to sign up to their services under the pretence that it is something to do with BT, which clearly as a separate company, a competitor of BT both in home phones and internet, BT are not working with Talk Talk.

A letter will be going to Talk Talk to explain how concerned I am about their sales methods, and I might contact BBC Watchdog too.

Update: Carphone Warehouse/Talk Talk have contacted me about this and are pledging action.

Update 2 : I have been very impressed with the line Carphone/Talk Talk have taken with theis, keeping me advised by email of developments and the action they have taken. All I can say is that they have dealt with this in a way that shows thhey do not accept this sort of behaviour from agents acting on their behalf.

Brilliant posting from A. Tory.

Anyone thinking of voting the in annual blog awards should become a regular reader of Letter from a Tory.

Read THIS to understand why his writing is so good.

More evidence of unbelievable stupidity of BBC East

Regular readers of this blog will know that I am not greatly enamoured with the local BBC we have in this area.

BBC East have further highlighted their inability to do their research with a feature they are having this week about having a "Staycation", which according to the local BBC is all about "Holidaying in the UK" and in particular "in the East".

Except, of course, this isn't what a "staycation" is. In simple terms it's about staying out home and visiting places locally. It is not about taking boating holidays on the Norfolk Broads instead of going to Italy (as they featured last night) or spending a few nights in a B&B on the East coast rather than going to Spain.

You don't have to take my word for it though. It's very easy to do a search on the internet which will tell you that the BBC East definition of a staycation is totally wrong.

Another self inclicted wound - What do headlines like this do for Labour's core vote ?

Is there any way to undermine Labour's core vote than to read headlines saying that the government is going to court to reduce the compensation payout to soldiers severely injured in Afghanistan ?

I can't think of anything which could make the government look less caring and more hypocritical given the current climate and the perceived penny pinching in Afghanistan.

It is symptomatic of this government though (as I wrote yesterday) that they are providing stories for The Daily Mail and The Express which write themselves (that is if the Express can avoid another Madeleine McCann story or link it in some way to Princess Diana.

Whilst there might be reasons for appealing against compensation payouts, irrespective of the mess the government are in politically, is it not the worst time possible from a military strategists point of view to be pursuing a court case in order to claim back what is only around £100,000 ? We have in recent years had something of a recruitment crisis in our armed forces and whilst there are reports that recruitment is easing due to the recessions (something the US forces have relied upon for year whilst recruiting in the poorest parts of the US), it sends a poor message to anyone thinking of joining the army at this moment.

But going back to Labour's core vote, those who were less than enthused about voting Labour last week in Norwich. What does it say to them about Labour's priorities. I always think that the ex local authority housed working class Labour voter are some of the most patriotic voters who take a deep pride n their country. This is why so many of them so happily switched to UKIP in last week's Norwich North by-election. These people might vote Lib Dem where there is a long established Lib Dem presence, they won't switch to the Tories out of a long held antipathy to that party, but UKIP provides a place to put their cross with no feelings of regret.

When Alistair Darling said yesterday that he is still optimistic of a Labour win next year, it really makes you question him on his economic forecasts too.

Mandelson spinning again

While Peter Mandelson follows the rigidly of defending Gordon Brown in the wake of the Norwich North by-election, the problem is that Labour just don't get what is is that Norwich North tells us.

Labour's line is that due to the circumstances in which Ian Gibson stood down, this election was all about expenses, and was a special circumstance unrelated to normal politics. What Labour fail to recognise this that this is a self inflicted wound, and these self inflicted wounds are the sign of a government that is not only unable to control events outside of its control, but those it can control are done wrongly, in this case effectively sacking Ian Gibson whilst doing nothing about the likes of Hoon, Blears and others.

I seem to recall the last Tory government going through a similar episode of self harm over things like "back to basics" and the sleaze that was endemic in the period from 1992-97.

Whilst it might seem like a good defence for Gordon Brown to claim Norwich North was different, the electorate know otherwise and this makes Labour seems even more out of touch.

Vote for your top ten blogs

It's that time of year again, when Total Politics asks you to vote for your Top 10 favourite blogs. The votes will be compiled and included in the forthcoming book, the Total Politics Guide to Blogging 2009-10, which will be published in September. This year the poll is being promoted/sponsored by LabourList and LibDemVoice as well as Iain Dale's blog.

The rules are simple.

1. You must vote for your ten favourite blogs and ranks them from 1 (your favourite) to 10 (your tenth favourite).
2. Your votes must be ranked from 1 to 10. Any votes which do not have rankings will not be counted.
3. You MUST include ten blogs. If you include fewer than ten your vote will not count.
4. Email your vote to toptenblogs@totalpolitics.com
5. Only vote once.
6. Only blogs based in the UK, run by UK residents or based on UK politics are eligible.
7. Anonymous votes left in the comments will not count. You must give a name

8. All votes must be received by midnight on 31 July 2009. Any votes received after that date will not count.

How utterly useless is the BBC weather website

The BBC used to have a really good weather website. It may not have been all singing, al dancing, but it told you the forecast, told you the temperatures and as clear to understand. Then the BBC decided it needed a revamp. Now it is useless as a means of predicting the weather.


Take a look at the temperature forecast for Friday this week. What does it tell us ?

It appears that in Norfolk the temperature is coing to be light orange, in parts of Cambridgeshire the temperature will be darker orange whilst in Londonderry it will be light green. What does that mean ? Where is the key ? Who on earth thought this is a good way of giving us the temperatures ?

The website also has much less data than the previous one. You used to be able to look at satellite maps which just showed precipitation, just showed cloud, indeed you could select and deselect so many options which are missing from the present website. Sadly the new (I know its about a year old but you get my drift) seems to rely on people being weather forecasters in order to be able to discern what the maps actually shows.

Oh, and please don't get me on to the fact that there is an obsession with telling us what the weather has been like. I know this, I can look out of the window !

Update : There is a key on the website. The point is that I expect it to be bearer to or on the map. If I missed it (and I am quite PC and internet savvy), how many others missed it ?

Far be it for me to agree with David Cameron

It is not very often that I can find myself agreeing with David Cameron. Too many people I know who have met him or know him speak so poorly about him as a person that I find it hard to ignore my instant allergic reaction to him. However, I do find some of what he has said to the press about possible spending cuts make sense.

On the BBC website it says of Cameron

"He highlighted what he said was the half a billion pounds spent on government advertising and the fact that people earning over £50,000 a year could still qualify for tax credits. "

It is hard to disagree with these as areas for cutting.

It is incredible sometimes to listen to local radio and find of the four adverts played in a advert break, one will be for tax credits, one is for direct.gov and one will be advertising some educational grant system that 99% of people cannot claim. It seems to me sometimes that government advertising seems to be there just to keep local radio stations in business.

As for tax credits I have found it absolutely crazy that myself and my wife qualify for tax credits. We both earn above average wages so why should we received tax credits ? When i mentioned to people at work that we receive them it was astonishing to see the reaction of people in similar circumstances to me who did not claim them because they presumed that tax credits were for the poor, not people earning a decent income. However, this is where a contradiction comes in to Tory policy.

The Tories also want to raise inheritance tax levels which only benefits the super rich, not those middle income earners. By removing tax credits and raising inheritance tax levels it might appear to many that middle income earners are subsidising the super rich. Quite how this would play at the ballot box would be very interesting.

And in essence, this is the problems with the Tories under Cameron, some sensible ideas, but full of contradictions.

Tom Watson on Norwich North

You'd have thought that Tom Watson, Labour' by-election attack dog, the man responsible for some of the least pleasant and aggressive Labour by-election campaigns in recent years would have something to say about Norwich North on his blog wouldn't you ? Wouldn't you ?

Apparently not.

It reminds me of the Daily Mail's re-writing of history when they were the only national paper that didn't report the loss of Romsey by the Tories in the 2000 by-election.

The denigration of the youth and women in politics

I got the time today to watch back some of the Sky News and BBC coverage of the count of the Norwich North by-election on Sky+. What astonished me was that when Chloe Smith turned up to the count, they commented very precisely on the colour of her top.


Would they have dreamt about doing so in such detail if she were a man ? Of course not. it is bad enough that it is suggested that she is too young to be an MP, but with the press seeking to make comments about what she is wearing it surely makes us all realise how much harder it is for women to get in to politics and be taken seriously.

On teatime I was travelling to my old political stamping ground in North Norfolk with Radio 5 live on and was amazed to hear so many comments being read out about Chloe Smith that were concentrating almost exclusively on her age. Now I didn't vote for her (quite evidently), but was disgusted by the implication that at 27 she should be nowhere near parliament. I pulled over and texted this response to the presenters.

"I am a Lib Dem voter and activist in Norwich North and have was involved in the election and was at the count today. I don't consider Chloe Smith's age to be a problem. It is policy and judgement that matter and she should be judged on these, not her age. Perhaps if more young people were interested in politics we might not be wedded as a country to so many outdated principles and rules that don't serve the modern world"

I hope Chloe Smith does a good job, but I don't believe she would do any better job if she was 47 rather than 27, indeed given the energy required to be a decent constituency MP (and I have seen how much energy it requires at close hand in North Norfolk), the fact that Chloe Smith does not possess a bus pass is surely an advantage ?

Norwich North By-Election Awards

Further to my Norwich North by-election awards nominations from election night, I declare these the winners.

Missed Opportunity Award Winners - Greens (For proclaiming that they were set to snatch second place then failing to run a campaign worthy of 4th place)

Best Campaign - Conservatives (For virtually not putting a foot wrong in terms of not doing anything that might expose their candidate to scrutiny)

Worst Campaign- Greens (Where was their campaign ?)

Best Candidate Nominees - Chloe Smith (Very on message, very much the Tory girl, very assured, if slightly boring)

Best Minor Party Campaign Nominees - Craig Murray (Perhaps the only campaign outside of the main 5 parties that was seen)

And an extra four awards -

Most gracious speech at the count - Chloe Smith (It's not always easy to be gracious in victory and I've seen some nasty winning speeches, but she spoke well)

Least gracious speech - Rupert Read (Whe lectured us all on clean campaigning then proceeded to attack the Lib Dems, Labour and the Tories. Hypocrite ?)

Nicest Party at the Count - UKIP (I couldn't vote for the Lib Dems as I was one of them and that would be unfair. The Tories were very friendly too, Labour were polite but the Greens not).

Best result - Joint winners - UKIP and Conservatives (Bigger victory margin than the Tories were predicting at the count, UKIP did better than anyone expected).

Do the press simply not understand elections ?

Since Ian Gibson resigned his Norwich North seat a few weeks ago, the press have been making predictions and assumptions about Norwich which serve to underline that the press simply do not understand elections properly.

The very earliest reports locally on TV were about how the Green Party would the main threat in this seat whilst the national press also adopted this view, along with the view that it was a shoe in for the Tories. This was a line the press had decided upon and a view that evidence, campaigning and visits to Norwich would not change or alter. Yes, it was clear that the Tories would win this from the moment Gibson resigned, the press' mind was on this all being about the Greens, to the exclusion of Labour, Lib Dems and UKIP.

Take for example the comments made to me by a BBC producer when I was waiting to appear on 5 Live drive. He said "It's going to be difficult for your lot, being squeezed in to 4th by the Greens". Now I knew this wasn't going to happen from the amount of literature being produced and delivered, but the the journalists were not interested in the campaign. In their minds the starting positions of the parties was also the finishing position. In effect they cared not one jot about what was happening on the ground and the campaign, the canvassing, the leaflets were not important and would not get in the way of the story they wanted to perpetuate.

Perhaps the most hard done by party in this election was UKIP. BBC East should hang their heads in shame for doing a head to head debate amongst (as they called it) the four main candidates, excluding UKIP, despite UKIP polling far more votes across Norfolk in the Euro elections that the Green party. The fact that UKIP came in 4th place, well ahead of the Greens and not far behind the Lib Dems speaks volumes about the way the press sought to get the result they wanted and not the real result. The press had their mind set on a Green breakthrough despite the fact that the Greens had no real campaign at all. The only things the Greens actually did in the campaign was to launch a campaign pledge (which all the signatories broke), which the Lib Dems refused to sign simply because it was a meaningless pledge. But oh how the press loved this pledge. Why ? Because it allowed them to indulge their obsession with the Green Party.

It's not just the BBC though. Last week Rod Liddle made himself look like a prize tit by devoting a whole article in praise of the Green surge and breakthrough in Norwich North. Other newspapers too had fallen for this guff. I spoke to a Sky News producer yesterday at the count who was asking me how close the it was between the Greens and Labour. She was shocked when I told her the Greens were 5th. "Poor Rupert" the Sky News producer replied. "You've fallen for it too", I replied, and she had. The press had bought their own lie.

Witness early reports on Sky News yesterday which were effectively saying from the count that they expected a Tory majority of 2000 because of the impressive showing of UKIP and the Greens. I saw the BBC journalist listening and scribbling notes. I said to her, without giving anything away "Take what they are saying with a pinch of salt".

So many of you will be saying these are the words of an annoyed Lib Dem, and yes, in many ways I am annoyed at the way the Lib Dems were treated in this election. All the press stories were negative, fed to them by the opposition. BBC East again reported April Pond's moat, but very little of the positive stuff whilst allowing the opposition to slag of the Lib Dems for refusing to sign their joke pledge not to slag each other off. The BBC didn't seem to understand the irony in this situation. But BBC East also chose to praise each of the candidates in their introductions in the TV debate except for April Pond, with her introduction being about her house. Truly awful and rather pathetic journalism.

But I know I am not alone in my distrust of the way the press seek to tell the story they want rather than telling the real story. I was chatting to a Tory MP at the count yesterday and he told me that the press asked for a statement from him on something recently. He said the thing they were reporting was untrue, and he told them that in no uncertain words. He repeated that he knew it to be a lie, and the press' response was "We're reporting it anyway". So what is the point ?

It is little wonder that political blogs are now becoming preeminent when it comes to find out real political news. Not only do most political bloggers really understand politics, and by this I don't just mean policy, but I mean elections, campaigns and strategy. But they also know what is bullshit and what is genuine. Whilst people might resent Iain Dale's Tory bias, at least we know his political leanings and you can cut through the bits you don't like to get to the key elements of truth within what he writes.

I am no great fan of Guido Fawkes self congratulatory style and his obsession with being Guido rather than Paul Staines, but he does the sort of journalism that political journalists today simply cannot be bothered to do. No wonder they resent him so much. He puts so many of them to shame.

Similarly you may not like my bias, and I have been called an attack dog by some people whose views I don't greatly respect, but I think those reading this blog would have got a far greater insight in to what is happening in Norwich North than you ever would have from reading The Guardian or watching and listening to the BBC (or Sky), which is a shame as they are my TV channel and paper of choice. The other advantage of a blog is that you can send a comment to the blogger and get a response. Try doing this with the BBC. I wrote days ago about their debate and I have still not had a response.

So whilst we are constantly being told that politics needs to be cleaned up, lets not forget that those who report our politics are themselves not entirely honest in their reporting. The truth is not important to them because they work to their own agenda, the agenda agreed by the newspaper owners or producers in advance and the agenda which fits what they want the outcome to be.

Ultimately though the problem with the reporting of politics is that political journalists do not understand anything that happens outside of Westminster and the old style political "lobby" journalists don't understand elections.

Update : I am reminded of what a Tory said to me at the count yesterday which highlight the level of of political knowledge of the typical political correspondent. One major TV news channel said to the Tories that this is the sort of seat they should expect to win because it really should be a Tory seat anyway. When the Tory told the news channel that since the war the seat had been Tory for just 14 years, the reporter had no idea. It would have taken the reporter 5 minutes on wikipedia to find that out.

Thanks for calling, do come again

Can I thank those of you who have looked in on this blog for the last few weeks to follow the Norwich North by-election. It has been a busy and quite exciting time for all those of us in this area who care about politics.

Now I appreciate that many of you read this blog just for the election coverage, but I would stress that this blog has been going for nearly three years, I post on all issues local, national and international, so I am not a one trick pony.

So if you like to rant, want to put me right on an issue or simply just want to read what a slightly euro sceptical Lib Dem in Norfolk has to say, do call again.

Cheers

Nich Starling - Norfolk Blogger

Greens split on Norfolk County Council ?

One of the area committees on Norfolk County Council threw up an interesting insight in to Green politics in Norwich.

After discussion with the two Labour County councillors and the two Lib Dem county councillors in the Norwich area, it was agreed that the Green Party group leader (Boswell) would chair the committee and that Lib Dem and Labour would rotate vice chairmanship. So what happened at the meeting ? Lib Dems and Labour support their Green Group Leader but the rest of the Green group vote against their leader and put someone else in as chairman.

Questions about arses and elbows might apply, but it tells us something of the internal problems the Greens are having with strong rumours also circulating about relationships between senior Greens in Norwich appearing to be somewhat strained.